Manchester area seems to be a hot bed of adjourned cases, lots of detail on CAG about them. I can't see what they will reveal that is of merit in your case but hey ho!

I can almost bet – nothing of merit. Only a change to the Act could do that.

Who represented them, can you remember? .

Their own witness as stated on the witness statements

McGuffick is of little value to them for the reasons I've already mentioned. Did the Rankine case come up?

No Rankine, but they did cite McGuffick. I tried to intervene to explain its lack of merit, but the judge wouldn’t allow me.

Barclays set off - any reference? what do the propose to set off, and against what? If the agreement is ruled unenforcible (which seems likely) there is nothing to set off against.

When did the Barclays citation get brought up, they can't just toss thing into the ring and hope, where is the principle of fair defence.

Again, I tried to intervene but the judge was adamant on hearing the defendants witness struggle on.

There is a fairly pursuasive arguement that to trade in the manner they have is illegal (loan sharking). We won't go there, tho!

No comment. An argument too far for my limited legal knowledge methinks.

Good result M8, I think they will fold, personally.

Worth thinking about, they sought leave to defend the whole case as issued. If the defence is ruled vexation then will that carry your whole case? it should!!

If the defendant has no defence then the action is passed, in its entirety. To fold would just mean paying you the money, this would be a better result for them.

I really hope they continue to fight this. I do think the judge was all set to decide the whole claim at the rescheduled hearing. He did mention he thought the court had messed up in not making judgement on the whole particulars of claim. He thought the claim should have been part 8 not part 7.

Prepare, but do not send, yet, a letter to the court requesting an adjournment to resubmit your case.

If the test cases go against the creditor then you would need to submit arguments based on the test cases.

They will do the same if the test cases go in favour of the creditor, for sure.

Have this ready to go then keep you ear to the ground on the test cases. Huckster is well informed, perhaps he would do the same. Don't wait for the re-scheduled hearing as you could miss the boat.

I am in the process of re-writing my witness statement, but obviously await any test case results. In fact I received the defences addendum witness statement after I had submitted my witness statement. (It was wrongly addressed!! And I received it only two days before the hearing). So I have an excellent reason to re-submit anyway. The point about Barclays as a new defence from them is well noted. In any event one condition for set-off is that the debt must be due and payable. I will argue that with no agreement from inception means no debt payable - ever. (Wilson v FCT).

Cheers m8